ArticleCureus2024
CBCT (Cone-Beam CT)-Based Online Adaptive Radiotherapy in the Post-operative Oesophageal Cancer Patient.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Current AI technologies in cancer diagnostics and treatment.Molecular cancer · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We present a case of a patient having cone-beam CT (CBCT)-based online adaptive radiotherapy (oART) on Ethos Therapy after oesophagectomy and gastric pull-up. This case report aims to demonstrate that daily oART is a viable treatment option for post-oesophagectomy patients. The patient's radiotherapy plan was generated on the Ethos system using an eight-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plan imported from the Eclipse planning system. The patient was prescribed 50.4Gy/28# over 5.5 weeks with concurrent carboplatin and paclitaxel. There were no changes to our department's standard clinical tumour volume (CTV) and planning tumour volume (PTV) margins due to the novel nature of the case. For each fraction of daily oART, the heart, right and left lungs, oesophagus and trachea were Ethos-contoured 'Influencer' structures which were reviewed and edited at the console. Minor edits were required to each structure. The adaptive plan was chosen for each fraction due to showing clear dosimetric benefits to both PTV coverage and organ at risk (OAR) doses. Lung doses were significantly reduced with the course mean lung dose reduction of 8.1% and the Lung-CTV V20 reduction of 4.4%. The treatment duration from the start of CBCT acquisition to the end of beam delivery averaged 19 minutes and 12 seconds. The patient was able to tolerate the time on the bed without incident within the scheduled 30-minute appointment slot. Our case demonstrates that significant inter-fraction anatomy changes occur in patients having radiotherapy after oesophagectomy. Without the use of adaption, we have seen that there would be clinically significant undercoverage of target volumes due to sub-optimal dose distribution. We plan to evaluate the imaging available in Ethos dose monitoring to establish if these margins could be reduced in patients treated with online adaptive radiotherapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.